Prospective assessment of key factors influencing treatment strategy and outcome of fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP)
Tóm tắt
Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) are a clinical entity with an increasing significance in clinical practice. Little is known about the conditions, which influence decision making and outcome. Level I trauma center. Prospective assessment of selected parameters of patients, who were admitted with a FFP in a 2-year period. Fractures were classified in accordance with the Rommens and Hofmann classification. Living environment, level of autonomy (independent walking), type of treatment (conservative versus operative), type of surgical technique, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L), Short Form-8 Physical Component Score (SF-8 PCS) and Short Form-8 Mental Component Score (SF-8 MCS), Barthel Index, Parker Mobility Score (PMS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) were collected at primary presentation (t1), at discharge (t2) and after 3 (t3) and 12 months (t4). Length of hospital stay, in-hospital complications, surgery-related complications, new osteoporotic fractures and mortality rate within the first year were also registered. The key factors influencing the choice of therapy and outcome were looked for. 110 patients, 99 women (90%) and 11 men (10%), were included in the study. Their mean age was 79.2 years (SD 10 years). Fourteen patients had FFP type I (12.7%), 59 FFP type II (53.6%), 11 FFP type III (10%) and 26 FFP type IV fractures (23.6%). All patients with FFP type I were treated conservatively. 48 patients with FFP types II-IV were treated conservatively and 48 operatively. Patients, who got a conservative outpatient treatment first and were hospitalized later, had higher FFP fracture types at admission. Operatively treated patients were hospitalized at a median of 33.5 days after the beginning of complaints, whereas the median day of admission of the conservative group was the day of trauma (p < 0.001). The operatively treated patients were hospitalized in a worse clinical condition (SF-8 PCS, EQ-5D-5L, autonomy). Length of stay (LoS) of operatively treated patients was significantly longer than of conservatively treated (p < 0.001). There was a tendency to more in-hospital complications in the operative group (p = 0.059). The rate of surgery-related complications (8.3%) was low with only one revision needed. Selected outcome parameters improved during the observation period nearly reaching the level before FFP after 1 year. SF-8 PCS, Barthel index and rate of patients living home were higher in the operative group at t4. The improvement of autonomy (independent walking) between t1 and t4 was significant in the operated group (p = 0.04) but not in the conservative group (p = 0.96). One-year mortality rate was 11.7% with no difference between the fracture types. One-year mortality rate of conservatively treated patients with FFP type II-IV was 13.5% versus 6.9% in the operative group (p = 0.38). Conservative treatment is appropriate in patients with FFP type I as well as in patients with FFP type II, provided that the last ones are hospitalized immediately after the traumatic event. Surgical treatment is recommended in patients with higher fracture types, with delayed presentation or after unsuccessful conservative treatment. In the conservative and operative group, all selected parameters considerably improved between t1 and t4 with a steeper increase in the operative group. The rate of postoperative complications is low. The 1-year mortality rate is the lowest in the operative group. Surgical stabilization of FFP is safe and reliable provided it is performed with care and in the appropriate target group.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Vuillemin N, Pape HC, Rommens PM, Lippuner K, Siebenrock KA, Keel MJ, Bastian JD. A bibliometric analysis of fragility fractures: top 50. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57(6):639. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina57060639.PMID:34205638;PMCID:PMC8233744.
Breuil V, Roux CH, Testa J, Albert C, Chassang M, Brocq O, Euller-Ziegler L. Outcome of osteoporotic pelvic fractures: an underestimated severity Survey of 60 cases. Jt Bone Spine. 2008;75(5):585–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2008.01.024 (Epub 2008 May 12 PMID: 18474446).
Andrich S, Haastert B, Neuhaus E, Neidert K, Arend W, Ohmann C, Grebe J, Vogt A, Jungbluth P, Rösler G, Windolf J, Icks A. Epidemiology of pelvic fractures in germany: considerably high incidence rates among older people. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(9): e0139078. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139078.PMID:26418971;PMCID:PMC4587805.
Rommens PM, Wagner D, Hofmann A. Fragility fractures of the pelvis. JBJS Rev. 2017. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.16.00057 (PMID: 28359073).
Linstrom NJ, Heiserman JE, Kortman KE, Crawford NR, Baek S, Anderson RL, Pitt AM, Karis JP, Ross JS, Lekovic GP, Dean BL. Anatomical and biomechanical analyses of the unique and consistent locations of sacral insufficiency fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(4):309–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318191ea01.PMID:19214089;PMCID:PMC2709278.
Eckardt H, Egger A, Hasler RM, Zech CJ, Vach W, Suhm N, Morgenstern M, Saxer F. Good functional outcome in patients suffering fragility fractures of the pelvis treated with percutaneous screw stabilisation: assessment of complications and factors influencing failure. Injury. 2017;48(12):2717–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.11.002 (Epub 2017 Nov 4 PMID: 29122281).
Yoshida M, Tajima K, Saito Y, Sato K, Uenishi N, Iwata M. Mobility and mortality of 340 patients with fragility fracture of the pelvis. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021;47(1):29–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01481-3 (Epub 2020 Aug 28 PMID: 32860102).
Hack J, Buecking B, Strauch L, Lenz J, Knauf T, Ruchholtz S, Oberkircher L. Self-rated health status and activities of daily living in the first 12 months after fragility fractures of the pelvis-a prospective study on 134 patients. Osteoporos Int. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-021-06104-0.
Osterhoff G, Noser J, Held U, Werner CML, Pape HC, Dietrich M. Early operative versus nonoperative treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis: a propensity-matched multicenter study. J Orthop Trauma. 2019;33(11):e410–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001584 (PMID: 31633644).
Rommens PM, Hofmann A, Kraemer S, Kisilak M, Boudissa M, Wagner D. Operative treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis: a critical analysis of 140 patients. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01799-6.
Wagner D, Kisilak M, Porcheron G, Krämer S, Mehling I, Hofmann A, Rommens PM. Trans-sacral bar osteosynthesis provides low mortality and high mobility in patients with fragility fractures of the pelvis. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):14201. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93559-0.PMID:34244526;PMCID:PMC8270908.
Rommens PM, Hofmann A. Comprehensive classification of fragility fractures of the pelvic ring: recommendations for surgical treatment. Injury. 2013;44(12):1733–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2013.06.023 (Epub 2013 Jul 18 PMID: 23871193).
Pieroh P, Höch A, Hohmann T, Gras F, Märdian S, Pflug A, Wittenberg S, Ihle C, Blankenburg N, Dallacker-Losensky K, Schröder T, Herath SC, Wagner D, Palm HG, Josten C, Stuby FM. Fragility fractures of the pelvis classification: a multicenter assessment of the intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities and percentage of agreement. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2019;101(11):987–94. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.00930 (PMID: 31169575).
Höch A, Pieroh P, Henkelmann R, Josten C, Böhme J. In-screw polymethylmethacrylate-augmented sacroiliac screw for the treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis: a prospective, observational study with 1-year follow-up. BMC Surg. 2017;17(1):132. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0330-y.PMID:29221479;PMCID:PMC5723042.
Oberkircher L, Lenz J, Bücking B, Eschbach D, Aigner R, Bliemel C, Schoeneberg C, Ruchholtz S, Hack J. Which factors influence treatment decision in fragility fractures of the pelvis?—results of a prospective study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021;22(1):690. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04573-2.PMID:34388997;PMCID:PMC8364046.
Beierlein V, Morfeld M, Bergelt C, Bullinger M, Brähler E. Messung der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität mit dem SF-8. Deutsche Normdaten aus einer repräsentativen schriftlichen Befragung. Diagnostica. 2012;58(3):145–53.
Gusi N, Olivares P, Rajendram R. The EQ-5D health-related quality of life questionnaire. In: Preedy VR, Watson R, editors. Handbook of Disease Burdens and Quality of Life Measures. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 87–99.
(2015) EQ-5D-3L user guide.
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. MD State Med J. 1965;14:61–5.
Parker M, Palmer C. A new mobility score for predicting mortality after hip fracture. J Bone Jt Surg Br. 1993;75-B(5):797–8. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.75B5.8376443 (PMID: 8376443).
Rodriguez CS. Pain measurement in the elderly: a review. Pain Manag Nurs. 2001;2:38–46. https://doi.org/10.1053/jpmn.2001.23746 (PMID: 11706769).
Oberkircher L, Ruchholtz S, Rommens PM, Hofmann A, Bücking B, Krüger A. Osteoporotic pelvic fractures. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2018;115(5):70–80. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2018.0070.PMID:29439771;PMCID:PMC5817189.
Rommens PM, Boudissa M, Krämer S, Kisilak M, Hofmann A, Wagner D. Operative treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis is connected with lower mortality. A single institution experience. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(7): e0253408. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253408.
Gericke L, Fritz A, Osterhoff G, Josten C, Pieroh P, Höch A. Percutaneous operative treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis may not increase the general rate of complications compared to non-operative treatment. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01660-w.
Höch A, Pieroh P, Gras F, Hohmann T, Märdian S, Holmenschlager F, Keil H, Palm HG, Herath SC, Josten C, Schmal H, Stuby FM, Pelvic Injury Register of the German Trauma Society. Age and “general health”-beside fracture classification-affect the therapeutic decision for geriatric pelvic ring fractures: a German pelvic injury register study. Int Orthop. 2019;43(11):2629–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04326-w.
Rommens PM, Arand C, Hopf JC, Mehling I, Dietz SO, Wagner D. Progress of instability in fragility fractures of the pelvis: an observational study. Injury. 2019;50(11):1966–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2019.08.038 (Epub 2019 Aug 27 PMID: 31492514).
Banierink H, Ten Duis K, de Vries R, Wendt K, Heineman E, Reininga I, IJpma F. Pelvic ring injury in the elderly: fragile patients with substantial mortality rates and long-term physical impairment. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(5):e0216809. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216809.
Maier GS, Kolbow K, Lazovic D, Horas K, Roth KE, Seeger JB, Maus U. Risk factors for pelvic insufficiency fractures and outcome after conservative therapy. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016;67:80–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2016.06.020.
Schmitz P, Lüdeck S, Baumann F, Kretschmer R, Nerlich M, Kerschbaum M. Patient-related quality of life after pelvic ring fractures in elderly. Int Orthop. 2019;43(2):261–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4030-8 (Epub 2018 Jun 26 PMID: 29946740).
Schuetze K, Eickhoff A, Dehner C, Blidon A, Gebhard F, Richter PH. Short-term outcome of fragility fractures of the pelvis in the elderly treated with screw osteosynthesis and external fixator. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01780-3.
https://www.statistik.rlp.de/fileadmin/dokumente/berichte/A/2033/A2033_201600_1j_L.pdf
Rommens PM, Drees P, Thomczyk S, Betz U, Wagner D, Hofmann A. The fragility fracture of the pelvis is a fracture indicating osteoporosis. Osteologie. 2018;27:144–53.